Sex, lies and prison

Townhall.com ^ | May 3, 2006 | by Kathleen Parker

[Airborne1986]

I am very leery of stories such as this where the author has a bias. One jury was hung and one jury convicted. So, more than a dozen average citizens heard all the evidence (including whatever the author has omitted)and believed beyond a reasonable doubt that he did it.

[JamesP81]

I phrased myself hastily in my first post

Understandable, I suppose.

I don't think you're one of them, but there are ladies on this forum who would think the kid had it coming, though. I've had enough problems with relationships without being in a position where I don't feel like I can trust anyone of the fairer sex. Maybe it's not quite as bad for me, since I think pre-marital sex is an affront before God, and thus I won't be engaging it, but even if I'm a perfect gentlemen an accusation would still land me in jail, then a courtroom, and then if I don't prove my innocence, a jail cell (and yes, in this day and time with these accusations you are guilty until proven innocent).

I'm aware that the chance of something like that happening to me is low, but the consequences are so high that I'm not sure that even that very minimal risk is justified. After being accused of something like that your reputation is permanently ruined. Getting a job gets to be much more difficult.

Basically, if I date a girl, I have little choice but to assume that she has it out for me until she can demonstrate otherwise. And even then, you can never quite be 100% sure. It's a shame. I really want to have a family someday, but this makes it all that much more difficult.

[JamesP81]

He will could get his hands dirty turning wrenches

My dad is a machinist and he doesn't make 20-30 per hour. But if turning wrenches did pay that much, I'd be doing it.

[Tax-chick]

I don't think you're one of them, but there are ladies on this forum who would think the kid had it coming, though.

No, I do not take that position. IF the facts in the article are accurate, the outcome is massively out of proportion to the young man's actions.

[Tax-chick]

I'm aware that the chance of something like that happening to me is low, but the consequences are so high that I'm not sure that even that very minimal risk is justified.

It's improbable that a rape charge could proceed without physical evidence. There are occasions, of course, such as the Duke lacross team accusation, but that's extremely political.

[eastforker]

A machinist that doesn't make $20 an hour is working for the wrong employer but I am sure it must have something to do as to where he lives. Wages here on the Texas gulf coast are quite good. My son makes $25 an hour as an auto mechanic. Installing sattelite dishes pays very well also working as a contractor. Boilermakers,millrights, pipefitters and welders are in high demand and they also make $18-25 an hour.

[JamesP81]

A machinist that doesn't make $20 an hour is working for the wrong employer but I am sure it must have something to do as to where he lives.

It is pretty rural around here. He stays so he can help take care of his elderly parents.

I guess the real stat to look at isn't necessarily pay, but pay vs cost of living. It's cheap to live around here too, although if he went to a larger city I think he'd still come out quite a bit ahead.

[JamesP81]

It's improbable that a rape charge could proceed without physical evidence.

It's not improbable enough. And there's more than just rape charges, like the coworker of my dad that was ordered by a court to pay child support to his girlfriend *after* a paternity test proved that the child was not his. So basically, if I had a long-term girlfriend she can cheat on me and then stick me with the bill.

Are you beginning to see the problem I'm faced with?

[Tax-chick]

I understand the point you're making, yes. I just don't think all that baggage can be reasonably attached to the situation in the article.

[JamesP81]

I just don't think all that baggage can be reasonably attached to the situation in the article.

The article is a good indicator of the conditions of our court system. Every situation will be different, the point is this: it's legally unsafe for me to trust a woman enough to date her. It's a sad and sorry fact. If I misjudge character even slightly, the result could be anything from a criminal charge to heavy civil penalties for years to come, and that's even if I don't do anything wrong.

Why would I run that risk? I know that the risk is small, but it must be weighed against the consequences. And it isn't looking so good from here.

[Tax-chick]

I think you're exaggerating the potential downside of "dating" someone to unrealistic levels, unless "dating" includes sex.

[OldArmy52]

American males' biggest mistake: marrying American females.

So many American women are women-libbers that it's playing Russian Roulette messing with them.

Visit a 3rd world country (for me it was China) and find a traditional values, family-oriented village (not big city) woman there, marry and bring her back here.

When dating here, I got my fill of libbers and female wack jobs.

[JamesP81]

I think you're exaggerating the potential downside of "dating" someone to unrealistic levels, unless "dating" includes sex.

Dating does not include sex. And furthermore, empirical evidence and life experience of people I know suggest otherwise at this point.

I really don't want to paint all women with a brush. A minority are the kind of people I am worried about. However, there are still enough of them that it's easy to get caught. And because women, when communicating, tend not to simply say what's on their mind directly it's nearly impossible for me to have even an inkling what's on a lady's mind.

The problem is somewhat alleviated since I restrict myself to ladies who go to good, biblically sound churches. Nevertheless, just because she's in a church every week doesn't make her a believer and doesn't mean she lives by what's taught. More than one person has found that out the hard way.

[Tax-chick]

Nevertheless, just because she's in a church every week doesn't make her a believer and doesn't mean she lives by what's taught.

That's true. However, if you don't have sex outside marriage, the odds of many of your negative outcomes drop to nearly nothing. Perhaps even statistically zero, although not "effectively" zero, since there's always at least one anecdote.

If you don't have sex, you're not going to get the woman pregnant. If she becomes pregnant anyway, you know it's not your child, and you can disclaim paternity (and prove non-paternity, if necessary) immediately. Many of the child-suppport cases involving non-fathers have turned on the statute of limitations.

If you don't have sex with a woman, the chance of her charging you with rape is mighty small, and the chance of a charge making it to prosecution is even smaller. (I suspect the young man in the article left DNA behind, even if he says he didn't complete the act, as it were.)

Yes, the worst, unlikely outcome is a possibility in any relationship ... but you can choose to live in fear of that, or you can choose not to.

[JamesP81]

If you don't have sex, you're not going to get the woman pregnant. If she becomes pregnant anyway, you know it's not your child, and you can disclaim paternity (and prove non-paternity, if necessary) immediately. Many of the child-suppport cases involving non-fathers have turned on the statute of limitations.

That doesn't work in my hometown. As I've said, there are a couple of people around here who've been stuck with the child support bill after their girlfriends went and cheated on them and got pregnant. I could seriously be dating some girl, not having sex with her, then she could go have sex with some other guy, get pregnant, and stick me with the bill. It could happen. It has happened. It's well within the realm of possibility.

I suspect the young man in the article left DNA behind, even if he says he didn't complete the act, as it were.

No doubt that he did. He, however, is guilty until proven innocent.

If you don't have sex with a woman, the chance of her charging you with rape is mighty small, and the chance of a charge making it to prosecution is even smaller.

Small, yes. Empirical evidence suggests that it's perhaps not as small as we'd like to think.

Yes, the worst, unlikely outcome is a possibility in any relationship ... but you can choose to live in fear of that, or you can choose not to.

It's not fear. It's more of a prudence thing.

Look, you shouldn't take it personally. Most women are fine people. There are few, I think, that would do something like this. But there are enough bad apples, unfortunately, to spoil the bunch and I find nearly impossible to sort them out. I'm just hoping that one will come along that's right for me that, somehow, I'll know that I can trust. She will be the one for me, but clearly, that's unlikely.

[Tax-chick]

A girlfriend can't "cheat," as there is no reasonable expectation of fidelity in that relationship. Just a quibble ...

I don't take any of it personally. I just, as an outside observer, have the impression that you've gone beyond prudence to paranoia. But maybe not ... statistically-improbable bad stuff does happen to some people, or we wouldn't have the stories. On the other hand (the third hand?) we have no proof that all the stories are true.

[JamesP81]

third hand

gripping hand, if you're a scifi nut like me.

It's all kind of moot anyway. All things in my life are in God's hands, this included. If He desires that I marry someone, I'm sure He will let me know in his own way in his own time. And He can be trusted.

[Tax-chick]

"Gripping hand" ... chortle!

It sounds like you've put your trust in the right place. No human being can be relied upon not to disappoint or hurt you, but God can always be trusted.